A new study by the Partnership for Health Analytic Research (PHAR) appears to bolster arguments by independent physicians and those who operate outpatient clinics that they are at a substantial financial disadvantage against hospitals when it comes retaining profits from the administration of injectable and infused drugs.
The analysis, completed by Jesse D. Ortendahl, MS, and Katalin Bognar, PhD, finds that hospitals retained 91% of profits from physician-administered medicines while serving 53% of patients receiving physician-administered medicines. Independent practices retained just 9% while serving 47% of patients.
Also by Bob Gatty: Advocates work toward Office of Men’s Health
PHAR, which counts a substantial number of drug manufacturers as clients, said its research also suggests that hospitals are earning more from administering medicines than the manufacturers who created them. For every $100 spent on physician-administered medicines in the hospital outpatient setting, the hospital retains $58, while the manufacturer receives less than $42, the report said.
Efforts to obtain comments from the American Hospital Association (AHA) and the Federation of American Hospitals were unsuccessful. However, in its 2019 Advocacy Agenda, AHA stresses the importance of “establishing fair and sustainable drug pricing and reimbursement.” AHA also calls on Congress to “restore vital funding and prevent further cuts to the 340B drug savings program, which allows hospitals to provide programs that improve access to care in their communities.”
Dr. Holton: Study emphasizes unfair disadvantage
Mara R. Holton, MD, CEO/president of Anne Arundel Urology in Annapolis, MD, and vice chair of health policy at LUGPA, said the PHAR study emphasizes what LUGPA contends is an unfair and anticompetitive marketplace disadvantage for physician-operated clinics.